While it’s usually David Lat’s domain to look under the robes (yuck), the decision of the Commission on Judicial Conduct in the case of Cattaraugus County Judge Larry M. Himelein is just too chock full of really great insider stuff to ignore.
Judge Himelein, who clearly has strong feelings on the subject of the Legislature’s refusal to grant a pay raise to judges any time in this or last millennium, decided that he wasn’t going to take it anymore. He recused himself from cases involving law firms that had a legislator on board, and made it clear that this wasn’t because he couldn’t be impartial, but because it was the only effective “weapon in [judges’] arsenal” to force movement.
This flew in the face of some advisory judicial ethics decisions that concludes that judges need not recuse themselves based upon the various lawsuits to force the legislature to address judicial pay, though the decisions concluded that it wasn’t mandatory, not that it was inherently unethical.
But Larry Himelein had perhaps an excess of moxie, and a hair-trigger finger on the “reply all” button on his email. And he wasn’t afraid to use them. From the WSJ Law Blog :
While I have long advocated for judges to take charge of their own fate in the pay dispute, and stop relying on the kindness of legislators or hiding behind the platitudes of judicial propriety while complaining bitterly at how their frozen pay won’t support their children’s education. The Legislature’s gamesmanship on the issue of judicial pay defies the usual standards of judicial propriety, and there is no dignity in poverty. It may not be a crime to go for a decade without a raise, but it is an affront to separation of powers and a facial assault in the independence of the judiciary. While the advisory opinions are long on judicial propriety, they fail to resolve the judicial independence problem. Leaving the judiciary begging at the Legislature’s door is, in my opinion, a far worse fate than showing that there’s a person beneath the robe.
That said, Himelein went whole hog, taking no prisoners in his assault on New York City. That was doomed to come back to haunt him. As much as I admire his “stones”, and agree with his view that the judiciary will relegate itself to the back of the bus if it doesn’t learn to stand up for itself, this was not likely the way to make friends and influence people.
The good news, of course, is that the Commission on Judicial Conduct, after cataloging Judge Himelein’s many transgressions in his blast emails and recusals, agreed to a censure as punishment. For those unfamiliar with this disposition, it’s the public statement that “you were a very bad boy judge and never do that again.” It’s not like they docked his pay or anything, the bunch of gutless wusses.
Judge Himelein, who clearly has strong feelings on the subject of the Legislature’s refusal to grant a pay raise to judges any time in this or last millennium, decided that he wasn’t going to take it anymore. He recused himself from cases involving law firms that had a legislator on board, and made it clear that this wasn’t because he couldn’t be impartial, but because it was the only effective “weapon in [judges’] arsenal” to force movement.
This flew in the face of some advisory judicial ethics decisions that concludes that judges need not recuse themselves based upon the various lawsuits to force the legislature to address judicial pay, though the decisions concluded that it wasn’t mandatory, not that it was inherently unethical.
But Larry Himelein had perhaps an excess of moxie, and a hair-trigger finger on the “reply all” button on his email. And he wasn’t afraid to use them. From the WSJ Law Blog :
Yesterday’s filing also said Himelein (Ithaca College ‘71, Suffolk Law ‘75) participated in: “[c]hiding, browbeating and insulting judges who did not recuse (calling them ‘wusses,’ ‘non-self-respecting,’ ‘gutless,’ and ‘wimp[s]‘), denigrating downstate judges in particular (’lackies’ and ‘toadies for the politicians’) and telling them to ‘grow some stones,’ respondent repeatedly urged his judicial colleagues to recuse en masse (’How about everyone recuses by 5:00 today???’).”That’s right, he really called his fellow judges all those things. And they were particularly directed at New York City judges. I bet they weren’t pleased with some upstate hick judge from Cattaraugus County (who even knew New York had a Cattaraugus County?) calling them names. And a county court judge, not even a Supreme!
While I have long advocated for judges to take charge of their own fate in the pay dispute, and stop relying on the kindness of legislators or hiding behind the platitudes of judicial propriety while complaining bitterly at how their frozen pay won’t support their children’s education. The Legislature’s gamesmanship on the issue of judicial pay defies the usual standards of judicial propriety, and there is no dignity in poverty. It may not be a crime to go for a decade without a raise, but it is an affront to separation of powers and a facial assault in the independence of the judiciary. While the advisory opinions are long on judicial propriety, they fail to resolve the judicial independence problem. Leaving the judiciary begging at the Legislature’s door is, in my opinion, a far worse fate than showing that there’s a person beneath the robe.
That said, Himelein went whole hog, taking no prisoners in his assault on New York City. That was doomed to come back to haunt him. As much as I admire his “stones”, and agree with his view that the judiciary will relegate itself to the back of the bus if it doesn’t learn to stand up for itself, this was not likely the way to make friends and influence people.
The good news, of course, is that the Commission on Judicial Conduct, after cataloging Judge Himelein’s many transgressions in his blast emails and recusals, agreed to a censure as punishment. For those unfamiliar with this disposition, it’s the public statement that “you were a very bad boy judge and never do that again.” It’s not like they docked his pay or anything, the bunch of gutless wusses.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
While I fully support a judicial pay raise, there’s something very unseemly about vocal support for it coming from a judge in Cattaragus County, where I’m pretty sure a county court judge salary gets you a mansion that would embarrass a nyc biglaw partner.
I’m not one to say if you don’t like the salary, get another job, because we need good judges. BUt if a county court judge salary in Cattaragus county doesn’t do it for you, get another job and get your gambling and/or drug habit under control.
My hinterlands correspondent made the same point to me earlier, Cattaraugus County being slightly less costly a place to live than say, oh, Manhattan. On the other hand, you take ’em as they come. Do they actually have mansions in Cattauraugus County? Is that what they call the doublewide (no, upstaters, it’s just a joke; don’t flame me, bro)?
Is it a mansion if its made out of logs?*
*(As a matter of personal taste, I’d prefer a beautiful log home to a downstate mansion).
Me too.
Sir, I’m curious to know how much a county judge pulls down yearly?
It appears that the Commission on Judicial Conduct’s “slap on the fanny” is about the same as when the Internal Affairs Div. ignores dash-cam footage of police brutality & buys the first round. I’m pretty sure that the S.S. were allowed to police their own also. Times ainta(new word) changing, or are they. Thanks.
How many times in during this judicial pay freeze did the legislature vote themselves a raise? I’ll bet dimes to dollars it was yearly.
That’s actually the root of the problem, that legislators tied judicial raises to their own raises, because they were politically unable to increase their own salary due to the public’s perception of the lousy job they do. The problem for judges is that they were a pawn in the legislators’ game, and ended up losing along with the legislators.
Mr. Greenfield:
They actually did dock my pay. I was cross assigned to supreme court (about $17,000 more per year) but they’ve taken that away for two years.
Busted down to County Court? Ouch. At least you don’t have to put up with those civil lawyer crybabies.
what’s the big deal folks…give the judges a raise, they are putting all these wackjobs behind bars for you…meanwhile all the state employees get more $$ and spend it on doughnuts, what’s wrong with this picture??
I am curious as to WHO wrote the reply as Mr. Himelein? As one of those who ended up stuck with him hearing my civil case in County Court (for no pay by his statement) I would guess he didn’t actually read this blog! BUT maybe it is just Agricultural Law, Bank & billing Statements, and Doctor Records that aren’t worth his time and bother – he’s just a judge, law and facts shouldn’t matter, right?
That was indeed Larry Himelein, though his comment was more than two and a half years ago. You guessed wrong. Perhaps the problem is that you weren’t any more knowledgeable with your suit than you are with your mistaken assumptions.
My assumption was that evidence means anything in court. Having not been involved in legal procedings prior, I trusted the system.
The assumption that there was no sarcasm in my comment was your mistake.
Delete my comment, if it offends you
A losing litigant thinks the judge sucked. Shocking. You trusted the system? So does everyone else. Welcome to the club.
If your comment was meant as sarcasm (which, even after you say that, still doesn’t appear to be the case), then it’s your job to make it clear since we aren’t dear old friends and no one here is attuned to some anon commenter named Laura’s nuances. It doesn’t offend. It’s just dumb. And if it was worthy of deletion, I would have. Your permission isn’t needed.
Welcome to the blawgosphere. If you thought you got a tummy rub for leaving a comment, you were sadly mistaken.